“Pay-out to staff as Bloomberg sales fall”

This is the headline in today’s Financial Times.  The article, written by Andrew Edgecliffe-Johnson, reports that:

“In a rare disclosure by the privately held news and data company, Bloomberg said its total terminal numbers had fallen by 11,470 or 4 per cent, from a peak last November of 268,800.”

However, even with the drop in the sale of terminals, revenues for Bloomberg in the last year have risen from $5.8 billion dollars to $6.2 billion dollars and  Bloomberg is ‘planning to add 1000 employees’.

New Bloomberg Law Report – Technology Law

I’ve written before about the excellent Bloomberg Law Reports.  I’m pleased to see that a new one has just launched:  Technology Law.  Take a look.   It joins the following lineup:

Administrative Law Monthly
Antitrust & Trade Monthly
Asia Pacific Law Bi-monthly
Banking & Finance Monthly
Bankruptcy Weekly
Class Actions Monthly
Congressional Monitor Weekly
Corporate Law Bi-weekly
Director & Officer Liability Monthly
Employee Benefits Bi-weekly
Environmental Law Quarterly
Executive Compensation Monthly
Health Law Monthly
Immigration Law Monthly
Insurance Law Weekly
Intellectual Property Weekly
Labor & Employment Weekly 
Litigation Weekly
Mergers & Acquisitions Bi-weekly
New York Law Monthly 
Privacy & Information Monthly
Risk & Compliance Monthly
Securities Law Weekly
Sustainable Energy Monthly
Technology Law Bi-weekly
UK Financial Services Law Monthly
White Collar Crime Monthly

Content from this high-quality analysis is being added to the Bloomberglaw.com digest feature.

Bloomberglaw.com’s “Fantastic” Feature

Perhaps it was fitting that on the day the Dow surged past 9,000 Bloomberg pitchman Ken Sanchez gave a presentation here at Stanford on the Bloomberglaw.com pilot program, set to launch on August 13th.  Mr. Sanchez is as dynamic, energetic  and entertaining a vendor representative as I have ever seen.  The presentation he gave yesterday to librarians and law school researchers elicited some true ”wows” from the audience.

In particular a law school senior analyst said “Fantastic!” when Mr. Sanchez demonstrated the Active Workspace and Notepad features.  I see many uses for these features in the curriculum as well, especially for the subject areas covered by the Bloomberglaw.com pilot:  Appellate Practice, Bankruptcy, Federal Securities, and New York Law.

The Active Workspace is a collaboration space, and the law school curriculum these days is all about collaboration.  It moves Bloomberglaw.com from being “just” a research tool, to a classroom technology tool.  And there are uses for collaboration beyond the classroom — clinics, journals, projects, and more.    When Mr. Sanchez pulled up a case in Bloomberglaw.com, he activated a Notepad feature where a yellow “pad” popped up next to the case for the user to take notes; these notes can then be saved to the Workspace. Anyone, even non Bloomberglaw users, may have access to the Active Workspace content.  Documents from Bloomberglaw.com can be annotated and mixed with uploaded files from anywhere, and the entire Workspace effort can be shared with anyone. 

I agree with our analyst:  Fantastic!

The pilot is set to roll out on August 13, and run until the end of the calendar year.  The aim is for Bloomberglaw.com to then fully launch in January 2010.  This is impressive for a project that began only in September 2008.

Bloomberg Law on the Web, an early review

Yesterday I got a sneak peek at Bloomberg Law on the web.  There were some features I really liked, such as the “Workspace,” but overall I was not impressed by the new interface.  The overall style is drab, and I just didn’t see many bells and whistles to compete with LexisNexis and Westlaw.  I was really hoping for more.  And I so, so, so want to see Bloomberg Law succeed and soar, so that we can have a good alternative to the CALR duopoly (alleviating dependency and enabling cancellations as needed).  Competition can be a wonderful thing.

But it was nice to hear the Bloomberg representative tell us that hundreds of lawyers are hard at work at Bloomberg law right now – indexing all federal and New York State case law.  It’s affirming to know that there’s work for some lawyers somewhere!

Unique citation analysis is being done by these lawyers.  The Bloomberg Law citator feature is completely human created, not machine generated.   In addition to citation analysis, these lawyers are writing “points of law” case summaries.

The case summaries are then being fed into the Bloomberg Law digest, which is becoming more than a digest in the traditional sense.  Commentary from other sources — including articles written by judges for the truly excellent Bloomberg Law Reports, for example – is also being folded in to the digests, along with the points of law.  The digest is evolving into a major treatise of American law.

The Workspace, mentioned above, is an online space where users can store, create, annotate, upload and share documents — a collaborative workspace.  This makes amazing sense to me.

Students will like the instant online help feature; and they will actually use the service in its web-based form as it is intuitive enough, and light years better than the existing interface.  The dockets remain the strongest feature for us and will get lots of use.  I would love to see Bloomberg link its docket content to its citator, and the representative indicated that that is a possibility.

But I didn’t see other features, such as “most cited,” or even indexes to statutes and regulations — in fact, the database seems all about the cases. 

Search results are displayed by case lists.  The orange and black screen display is not pleasing to the eye, not to my eye anyway. 

My review is an early one, and based only upon a brief presentation.   The planned launch date is August 3rd, and I plan to study it  in great detail then, and will share my impressions.  So please stay tuned.

Happy Days No More

In the not too distance past, say back when Happy Days was a popular TV show, the annual song and dance between publisher, library director and dean went something like this:

Legal publishers would post annual price increases with an average of 11% – 15%.

The library director would then tell his or her dean, “Gosh, Look at this:  Law books are going up by 11% – 15%.”

The dean would then take out his or her checkbook and tell the director, “Outrageous.  Here’s your library’s annual 15% budget increase.”

Those days are over.  So over.  So, so over.

Today when I tell the dean that a certain publication is going up by a double-digit price increase, his reply is quick and unequivocal:  “That’s easy,” he says, “cancel it.”

Many of us — myself included — still have not received next year’s library budget.  But there is no doubt in my mind that a sea change in library collections will be forced by changing budgets and starting next year (by next year, I mean next “fiscal year,” which for us begins on September 1, 2009 – so next year is right around the summer corner).  I anticipate a reduction of at least 15%.  Further, my book funds — i.e., funds used for monographs — are entirely endowment based; I shudder to think what will happen there.

Let’s take a few examples of how the law library landscape might change.

We subscribe to both United States Code Annotated (USCA) and United States Code Service(USCS).  Last year here’s what we paid for each:

We paid $1,645 for USCS (a Lexis product); and we paid a total of $5,376 to West for their USCA in 2008, including all bound volumes and pocket parts.

Each set is a complete annotated version of the United States Code.  The quality on both is extremely good.  There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that any student, professor or practitioner can perform adequate legal research with just one or the other — no one needs both.  So faced with that fact and the budget reality, which one will the dean say “that’s easy” — the one that costs $ 1,645 or the one that costs $ 5,376?

Depending upon how my budget situation shakes out, we may even face the rather drastic step of cancelling some online databases.  There are three gigantic legal online commercial databases, each with its own benefits and features, but each also a complete online law library.  Here’s what they are costing us:

Bloomberg Law:  Free

LexisNexis:  $ 68.00 per FTE, with minimum of $ 15,000 and maximum of $ 50,850

Westlaw:  $ 73.27 per FTE, with minimum of $ 15,878 and maximum of $ 64,206

Looking back over the past few years helps show pricing patterns, which could aid in the decision making:

LexisNexis:

2008:  $ 34,980 (6% increase over previous year)
2007:  $ 33,000 (5%)
2006:  $ 31,497 (5%)

I should note that this year LexisNexis “gets it” and are holding next year’s price to the same amount as last year’s.  We’ll be adding them to our Good Guys list (see also this item).

Westlaw:

2008:  $ 39,951 (7% increase over previous year)
2007:  $ 37,338 (7%)
2006:  $ 34,773 (14%)

Some things will have to go.  Over the rest of the summer I and my colleagues will be making some tough decisions.  Redundancy is nice, but may not be affordable.

Bloomberg Old and New

We gave our Advanced Legal Research class a brief (about 40 minutes) introduction to Bloomberg Law law week.  As soon as we logged on to Bloomberg one student raised her hand and asked, “Why does it look the way it does?”  And as part of an in-class exercise we asked for their impressions of the database, and I have copied some of them below.

Meanwhile our colleague John Palfrey is twittering today about Bloomberg’s new interface. John is at the University of Pennsylvania law school for an academic law librarians conference and Bloomberg presented there, saying it will launch the new BLAW this summer … a “very slick” interface, according to John and “much more so than the big 2″ [i.e., LexisNexis and Westlaw].

John tweets that BLAW will also have “a shared work and presentation environment — a ‘Workbench’ — that would allow collaboration within the BLAW world.”

We at Stanford get to see the new interface next month, and I can’t wait to see it.

And here are some of our students’ impressions of the old (present) Bloomberg:

I thought the comment about how “Retro” (or, to be more honest, how “ugly”) the Bloomberg Terminal interface was lead to an interesting discussion.  I’ve been resistant to learn Bloomberg largely because of how intimidating the interface is.  I think making searches intuitive is a major challenge for a lot of legal research (compare Westlaw/Lexis to, say, Google) and I’m glad people are finally starting to realize that, and improve the interface/search interpretation protocols.

Bloomberg’s interface isn’t lawyer-friendly, but its docket database is fantastic.  The ability to see, on a national map, all of the cases filed against a company on a particular issue and to see the law firms involved is great for lawyers involved in complex litigation.  Looking forward to the web-based interface.

. . . [Bloomberg] does seem to have a variety of information available — I even saw some Above the Law posts listed . . .

Bloomberg is particularly intriguing.  With the current interface I don’t think I could ever actually use it.  The colors and layout were not user-friendly, so I’m glad to hear it is changing.  I also don’t understand the added security measure of a special log-in key [the B Unit].  Nonetheless, the database itself seemed useful, especially for its streamlined news service and inclusion of case filings and court dockets.

Bloomberg, while seemingly requiring considerable background knowledge to operate efficiently, seems to contain a wealth of interesting information.  In particular, I was impressed by the Docket monitors, and how you could see when and where companies were sued, who represented them, etc.

I thought it was interesting that Bloomberg is only now trying to make its interface more legal-user-friendly.  I find it really difficult to look at at the present time. . . .

I didn’t realize how extensive Bloomberg’s court filings and docket database is.  I liked the feature of Bloomberg that allowed us to see a geographical breakdown of where companies are being sued and also a breakdown of what firms were representing them.

As a public interest student, I was shocked to be so impressed with the Bloomberg Law search capabilities.  In particular, the search by company that shows type of litigation both listed and charted, suits by state, and contact info. for parties with all docket info.  This would be very helpful in a public interest setting as well.

Bloomberg actually looks really useful.  I liked the way they organize the news by company and then by topic.  . . . if the case summaries explain the citator symbol (e.g., explaining why the case is no longer good), then Bloomberg would be awesome.

Frankly I was amazed by the sheer range of information available on Bloomberg.  The summaries of news, trends and general developments in litigation are transaction was particularly striking.

It’s interesting that Bloomberg allows you to do keyword searches of multiple dockets.  The colors and layout are rather distracting.

Bloomberg Law Reports – Follow the bouncing URL

I’ve written about the Bloomberg Law Reports.  They’re good.  Very good.  But they’re not good enough to justify the hoops we now have to go through to provide access to them.  Up until mid-June (6/19 to be exact) I received via e-mail nice PDFs of each issue, and I then selectively forwarded the issues to faculty who I thought would be interested.  Quick, easy — a nice library service.

But starting on June 25th I now receive (weekly?) notices such as this one:

Bloomberg Law Reports® can now be found at:
 
 
Bloomberg Law Reports are comprehensive legal analyses targeted to the legal and financial communities. Bloomberg Law Reports examine recent legal and regulatory developments covering a wide array of topics including: Antitrust & Trade, Asia Pacific Law, Banking & Finance, Bankruptcy, Corporate Law, Director & Officer Liability, Employee Benefits, European Law, Executive Compensation, Health Law, Immigration Law, Insurance Law, Intellectual Property, Labor & Employment, Litigation, Mergers & Acquisitions, Privacy & Information, Risk & Compliance, Securities Law, and Sustainable Energy.
. . .
Issues of Bloomberg Law Reports delivered by e-mail are currently provided on a complimentary basis. Please feel free to distribute them throughout your firm. To view enhanced versions of Bloomberg Law Reports, including hyperlinks to cited materials, please access the reports on the Bloomberg Professional� service (BBLR <GO>). For more information on BLOOMBERG LAWSM (BLAW) and the Bloomberg Professional service, please contact us: . . .
“Issues of Bloomberg Law Reports delivered by e-mail . . . ” Huh?  Are they?  Or aren’t they?

Each week the URL changes.  This is far too much trouble for me or our faculty.  And I don’t have the time to visit the website, download each report and then share it.  So I’ve now stopped reading the Bloomberg Law Reports – there are limits to what I can do.

IP-based access works.  Passwords work (although IP-based is better).  Bouncing URLs don’t.  And biometric B-units are a nuisance, for me anyway.

Many of our students and faculty want to access our resources from home.  A consistent URL, which can be bookmarked, is really needed for them to read the Bloomberg Law Reports.  URLs that change weekly add far too much frustration.

And these changes came without any explanation.

Bloomberg Law Reports

I’ve raved about the Bloomberg Law Reports; now you can all see for yourselves just how good they are.  This is from an e-mail I received today from Bloomberg:

Bloomberg Law Reports® can now be found at:
Bloomberg Law Reports are comprehensive legal analyses targeted to the legal and financial communities. Bloomberg Law Reports examine recent legal and regulatory developments covering a wide array of topics including: Antitrust & Trade, Asia Pacific Law, Banking & Finance, Bankruptcy, Corporate Law, Director & Officer Liability, Employee Benefits, European Law, Executive Compensation, Health Law, Immigration Law, Insurance Law, Intellectual Property, Labor & Employment, Litigation, Mergers & Acquisitions, Privacy & Information, Risk & Compliance, Securities Law, and Sustainable Energy.

To find out more about Bloomberg Law Reports—or if you are interested in contributing an article to Bloomberg Law Reports—please contact one of the legal analysts listed at the bottom of the relevant report.

To view enhanced versions of Bloomberg Law Reports, including hyperlinks to cited materials, please access the reports on the Bloomberg Professional® service (BBLR <GO>). For more information on BLOOMBERG LAWSM (BLAW) and the Bloomberg Professional service, please contact us:

In the U.S.

blaw_us@bloomberg.net

And here is a list of their titles — so far to date, as they continue to add new ones — along with frequency of publication noted:

Antitrust & Trade -Monthly
Asia Pacific Law – Quarterly
Banking & Finance – Weekly
Bankruptcy – Weekly
Corporate Law – Weekly
Director & Officer Liability – Monthly
Employee Benefits – Bi-weekly
European Law – Monthly
Executive Compensation – Monthly
Health Law – Monthly
Immigration Law – Monthly
Insurance Law – Weekly
Intellectual Property – Weekly
Labor & Employment – Weekly
Litigation – Weekly
Mergers & Acquisitions – Monthly
Privacy & Information – Monthly
Risk & Compliance – Monthly
Securities Law – Weekly
Sustainable Energy – Monthly